Situational Awareness - bearing report from AWACS
-
When I request a “vector to nearest threat” from AWACS they give me an aircraft type, a bearing and distance. Is the bearing they are providing understood to be off the nose of my aircraft? For example if I am on 090 heading and they give a threat report of “2 ship Mig 21, bearing 120, 15 miles”; then I would expect to find the MIGs at my 4 o’clock position and would turn right to intercept them.
Am I understanding the bearing report correctly?
-
yes
otoh, a group 30degree off your nose wouldnt be on your 4 clock, but you get the idea correct, they would be on your right hand side.
-
No, it means you have to turn to a heading of 120° in this case 30° to the right.
Moort I believe is assuming you use bullseye format, which it seems you do not do.
We keep you on a heading of 090 and the migs at 060 you have to turn 30 left.
If the migs are at 300 you have to turn 90 left to 360 and another 60 left to 300 so 150° left.
-
Thanks for the input guys - its still a bit confusing as there seem to be several ways that ‘bearing’ is used. I believe my original example is still correct, however I may not have explained it properly - I am assuming the bearing is always expressed off the front of the aircraft - in other words the nose of the aircraft is 000 so a bearing of 120 degrees would point to the 4 o’clock position.
However if the AWACS is telling me to turn to 120 degrees to intercept the MIGs (putting the MIGs on my aircrafts nose) then that would mean turning 30 degrees to the right.
Hans - I seem to recall something in the docs about using Bullseye vs the aircraft for bearing calls.
I’m not sure I have a solution yet - If the more realstic way to go is with Bullseye calls - however there is a bit more mental calcaulations there it seems - having to determine your F16’s position relative to Bullseye, the MIGs position relative to Bullseye and then visualize where the MIGs are in relation to the F16. Seems more intuitive that AWACS wouled give a bearing based on the aircraft calling for a vector.
-
No your example is incorrect. Bearing is a confusing word that can mean many things depending on context.
When you call AWACS, they give you an absolute bearing. This means that it is a bearing in reference to the North, not to your nose. So you turn to the heading AWACS gives you.
Calls made o’clock, are relative bearing. 12 o’clock is on your nose, always, no matter where the north is.
Absolute bearings are useful, if you want to easily relay information to another flight, or within a flight where not everyone may have the same heading.
Relative bearings are useful, when your flight is in formation and you want to relay information, i.e. “Cowboy11, Mud right 1 o’clock”.It’s confusing, as a bearing in marine navigation is always relative. In the US army a bearing is always given relative to one of the cardinal directions. And in aviation bearings can be both relative and absolute. In Falcon however, if you hear degrees, it’s always absolute (if I’m not mistaken).
-
Jeebus guys, way to complicate something so simple
If you aren’t using bullseye you simply turn to the compass degree that AWACs read to you. That’s it.
If AWACS calls bandits 120* 45nm, you simply turn to 120* and done. Bandits should be 45nm off your nose. Give-or-take a few degrees and miles considering that the bandits will be moving during the time that you are turning.
That’s what I’ve experienced, anyway.
I’m not sure I have a solution yet - If the more realstic way to go is with Bullseye calls - however there is a bit more mental calcaulations there it seems - having to determine your F16’s position relative to Bullseye, the MIGs position relative to Bullseye and then visualize where the MIGs are in relation to the F16. Seems more intuitive that AWACS wouled give a bearing based on the aircraft calling for a vector.
There was an article, I think somewhere on SimHQ, that explained when using bullseye calls, if the difference in degrees/miles from your bullseye posit to the bandits posit is greater than a certain number, you should not/don’t have to engage. When using bullseye I just guesstimate from an image in my head and I get close enough.
-
I’m not sure I have a solution yet - If the more realstic way to go is with Bullseye calls - however there is a bit more mental calcaulations there it seems - having to determine your F16’s position relative to Bullseye, the MIGs position relative to Bullseye and then visualize where the MIGs are in relation to the F16. Seems more intuitive that AWACS wouled give a bearing based on the aircraft calling for a vector.
Most realistic is by setting “Radio Calls Use Bulls-eye”.
When tgt is below a certain distance (do not remembered exactly, should be around 30 - 20Nm) … AWACS revert to BRAA.
The problem of BRAA call, is that indicated tgt position is ONLY valid for one guy at a time!
This information is usless for all other that are not on the same location! …That is why using the Bullseye is better! … a Bullseye posit is valid for EVERYONE how knows where the Bullseye is.
-
F4 and the AI awacs is a bit unrealistic no matter what you do.
There are 16 controllers on the Mission deck of a senty. Those guys can easily give their data in Bullseye and BRAA mode.
They will give periodic updates on Bullseye format for everybody to hear and use.
If they are controlling a flight of F15s to target a group of red fighters and vector other Fighter / Bombers away in that closer controll situation BRAA will be used.That intelligent switch, based on intend and available manpower (if red air has 200 flights up the Awacs controllers will be very busy just tracking and giving ocasional bullseye updates, if there are 2 Red flights you bet all blue guys close to that will get the BRAA treatment) is probably not possible in F4.
Maybe it could be done that the AI AWACS switches from Bullyeye to BRAA if the distance is less then , say 30 miles.
-
There are 16 controllers on the Mission deck of a senty.
Yes … but only 2 talking.
Maybe it could be done that the AI AWACS switches from Bullyeye to BRAA if the distance is less then , say 30 miles.
Already the case as I previously said.
-
if there are 2 Red flights you bet all blue guys close to that will get the BRAA treatment) is probably not possible in F4.
Well, it shouldn’t be that much of a problem for a computer. It can easily calculate all individual bearings. The thing becomes problematic only on the in-game radio messages scale. Even those could be easily per-flight or even per-plane routed. Per-flight using different victor channels would be even quite realistic scenario.
Even in flooded situation the controllers can give individual guiding to their flight of interest, if it is considered a priority thing to do.
The AI is in fact quite good at calculating these individual bearings. If you have seen large gorilla coming home from a mission, and using the AI Tower: the tower makes excellent fan out spacing for the flights. I don’t think average ATC can do the same for 15-20 planes in real time! If the pilots fly by the orders, it is very beautiful to see from the ACMI.
(Of course the ATC may have calculative tools or extra personnel to do similar. But to see it coming from a “simple” game is quite nice!)Is there a brevity word for relative bearing? In (Falcon4 context) aviation the bearing is always true bearing, or you get bullseye calls. You can also use clock-face (from AI wingmates too), which are relative. But what is the brevity to indicate relative bearing?
We in 87th use it something like “new contact, left 20, range 35…”, but there is no specific brevity word for that.
-
Most realistic is by setting “Radio Calls Use Bulls-eye”.
When tgt is below a certain distance (do not remembered exactly, should be around 30 - 20Nm) … AWACS revert to BRAA.
The problem of BRAA call, is that indicated tgt position is ONLY valid for one guy at a time!
This information is usless for all other that are not on the same location! …That is why using the Bullseye is better! … a Bullseye posit is valid for EVERYONE how knows where the Bullseye is.
+1 it takes a bit, but it comes second nature.
I’ve tried to revert back to bearing/distance once and inmediatly ticked it off. Killed mi SA.S!
-
The real problem for the AI is not to calculate BRAA, it does that perfectly and in fact each human will hear a slightly different call for the same contact (if the BRAA format is used and the guys are not in close formation.
Lets say we´re heading north, line abreast with 20 miles seperation and there is a mig in the middle between us and I ask for vector to threat:
I will hear 10 miles at 090 and you will hear 10 miles at 270.What happens in F4 is that the only thing each computer knows is that someone in the flight requested a vector. The sound that is played is that calculated on each computer for the human controller airplane on this computer.
Overhauling how that works would require the AI to make intelligent decissions which flight needs to get close control in BRAA and then maybe the magic possibility of the AWACS controller to say 4 different things to 4 different pilots at the same time could be fixed.
Yes overall just no matter what seems a bit more realistic then the alternative.
OTH I like it easy (and since I am the guy that killed 1200 migs on his own I deserve my own private awacs controller)Awacs using relative bearing: I don´t think that could work. The update on the friendlies heading is probably not frequent enough to give precise relative vectors, specially with the blue guys already maneuvering to engage
-
The real problem for the AI is not to calculate BRAA, it does that perfectly and in fact each human will hear a slightly different call for the same contact (if the BRAA format is used and the guys are not in close formation.
Yep … This is a sort of cheating method.
-
To answer some of the previous questions, it is better if you can get used to using Bullseye as soon as you can. This is imperative if you plan on flying a large force exercise with humans, but not as important if you are flying single player offline.
My technique is to make my MFD with the HSD the Sensor of Interest and then placing my cursor on the location that AWACS called out. It gives me a quick visual idea of where the bad guys are in relation to myself and my flight path.
-
To answer some of the previous questions, it is better if you can get used to using Bullseye as soon as you can. This is imperative if you plan on flying a large force exercise with humans, but not as important if you are flying single player offline.
My technique is to make my MFD with the HSD the Sensor of Interest and then placing my cursor on the location that AWACS called out. It gives me a quick visual idea of where the bad guys are in relation to myself and my flight path.
Thats exacly how I been handling it
-
Hans explained it correctly to you. Some would encourage you to use bullseye format from the start for the sake of realism, but it’s your choice.
Also bear in mind that “request picture” would give you directions to nearest enemy plane regardless of type, and “vector to threat” apparently to the nearest fighter. AWACS also doesn’t care if the enemies are crashing, and if you use AWACS for situation awareness in combat then you need to wait for the enemy to crash or explode to get a vector to the next one.
(Point: could we not have AWACS report vectors to the nearest 3-5 enemies instead of just one?) -
IMHO i think the most realistic is by setting “Radio Calls Use Bulls-eye” also because if the communication is intercept, the ennemy will still not know your position (unless they know the location of the bulleye).
On the other hand, a radio call from AWAC giving you ‘BRAA’ of bandit threat can be, once intercept, used by ennemy to know your position.
Isn’t it ? -
OK guys, have just read the posts here. As an ex air traffic controller, I have handled over 80 aircraft, all being vectored, changing altitude, and using speed control in a 30 minute period with the help of a handoff controller and someone to help do computer inputs. As a Falcon4 AWACS I use several different ways of informing aircraft of picture/threat. I use bullseye as a general guide to aircraft over sixty miles away from route of flight. When the flights break 60 miles, I will use o’clock call or bullseye again. If not in sight or on radar then will use BRA for futher transmission, usually within thirty miles. If not using bulleye, then all calls are off the nose of the lead aircraft (the only target you get in falcon). The most important part of the AWACS controller is to know when to shut up. “Clock” directions are general directions, using “bearing” is a positive heading to another aircraft as they are at that moment. I also use “heading” if you are being guided to a location. Using AI AWACS/ATC in F4 is kind of lame, that is why a human is usually better in answering your questions.
-
Lumper, okay so a “bearing” call in F4 BMS is a heading to turn toward and fly to intercept a target - in other words equivilent to AWACS saying “Fly Heading xxx” to intercept the target - am I understanding that correctly?
-
how do you indicate ur posit to the given bandit using BE?
QT